Whats the proper procedure if a vendor ships you something illegal by accident

[Ezekiel]

I had to get 3 of my 10 round AR 9mm mags replaced from C-products and I explicitly wrote on a note that I need to be sent 10 rounders. Unfortunately C-products sent me 32 rounders, their receipt even says REPLACE 10 ROUNDERS.

Should I just be notifying of them their error and send it back to them or should I be bringing the mags to the police and reporting what happened? I'd like to avoid any sort of issues involved with legality so would like to do everything by the book. Would disassembling the mags make them effectively nonfunctional so that I can legally ship them back?

[Ezekiel]

I'm sorry if I posted it in the wrong forum or if it's improper at all to post these threads, please delete if it is improper.

[hoozaru]

this thread should be removed, possible DOJ trolling?

[Shotgun Man]

This issue has been queried before on calguns. Sorry I can't be bothered to research the thread.

My idea has always been that if the hi-caps arrive at your doorstep through no misconduct on your part, it may be considered a gift from god-- kinda like finding clearly abandoned property.

I'm not seeing the criminal liability if you were just magically sent hi-caps.

Maybe you have a contractual duty to inform your seller that he did not comply with your request? I don't even see that. He did not comply with the terms of the contract, but you have a right as a contractual party to accept fully the non-compliant performance of the contract.

[Ezekiel]

Ok I was under the impression that is illegal to own hicaps you didn't own before the hicap magazine ban.

[Experimentalist]

I had to get 3 of my 10 round AR 9mm mags replaced from C-products and I explicitly wrote on a note that I need to be sent 10 rounders. Unfortunately C-products sent me 32 rounders, their receipt even says REPLACE 10 ROUNDERS.

Should I just be notifying of them their error and send it back to them or should I be bringing the mags to the police and reporting what happened? I'd like to avoid any sort of issues involved with legality so would like to do everything by the book. Would disassembling the mags make them effectively nonfunctional so that I can legally ship them back?

In keeping with the tradition of CalGuns, I'm going to try to offer a helpful response. Sarcasm and paranoia aren't particularly helpful, guys.

First: I'm not a lawyer. You should read the public law, and make your own decisions.

The relevant law:


12020. (a) Any person in this state who does any of the following is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in the state prison:

.
.
.

(2) Commencing January 1, 2000, manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives, or lends, any large-capacity magazine


Let's go through the list on item (2):

You did not manufacture, or cause to be manufactured, the magazines in question.

You did not import them into the state, the manufacturer did. In fact, you warned them against doing so.

Assuming you don't sell them, offer them for sale, or give or lend them, I believe, in my lay-mind, that you're legal.

Just my $0.02. I'm not a lawyer, this isn't legal advice. I'm just trying to give you a sense of the public code, you may wish to counsult a lawyer.

[Shotgun Man]

Ok I was under the impression that is illegal to own hicaps you didn't own before the hicap magazine ban.


Although Experimentalist covered this well, mere possession of hi-caps is not illegal. I think even a convicted felon can have them as the felonious possession prohibition extends to firearms and ammo only.

[Spaceghost]

If would take them apart a.s.a.p. and ship them back to be safe.

[LAK Supply]

As some others have said... I don't think you did anything illegal. They would have been the ones doing something illegal by selling/importing into the state. It sounds like you have some new goodies.

[Diabolus]

I would recommend doing as Spaceghost has suggested.

[Spaceghost]

We all have certain comfort levels, and this situation has clearly beyond his. On top of that, he went and posted something on a board we know is being watched by people that are NOT our friends. Are three stupid high caps worth his freedom? What about him sleeping soundly at night? IF they concerned him so much that he posted the question here, he is in over his head. Take them apart and be done with them. What each of us would do in this situation is something best discussed in a non-public forum at the next calguns shoot, lunch, or an after shoot beer. I reserve my personal opinion for when I am in the company of "friends".

Unsupported by any reasoning.

[LECTRIKHED]

TROLL

Look at this guys post count. First post he admits to a possible felony.

[USN CHIEF]

Take them to the police department and turn yourself in.

Yep, you already made it public... :banghead:

[Ezekiel]

I guess in any sort of community there are reactionaries. Thanks for the insight guys, I'll take the appropriate action.

[Experimentalist]

TROLL

Look at this guys post count. First post he admits to a possible felony.



Look at my post count: Posts: 58
And my join date: Join Date: May 2006

Am I a troll just because I try to limit my posts to substantive contributions?

I fail to see how the OP is a troll. He asks a legitimate question about a plausible situation. I can see the potential "troll" label if he his somehow advocating illegal behaviour. He is not.

[G17GUY]

Look at my post count: Posts: 58
And my join date: Join Date: May 2006

Am I a troll just because I try to limit my posts to substantive contributions?

I fail to see how the OP is a troll. He asks a legitimate question about a plausible situation. I can see the potential "troll" label if he his somehow advocating illegal behaviour. He is not.

You know we are under attack about legalities by “the noobs”; don’t you? We are a gun community, not drama queens. Get on board or get off. No dead weight allowed here.

[MudCamper]

If you're worried about it, first, take them apart and turn them into parts kits. Then send them back to C Products and ask for the correct item. No problems.

[Diabolus]

Other people have already mentioned this, but this user is posting some information that could potentially turn into some serious legal problems. We all know what the law states and we also know people are still being charged with felonies for AK47 parts.

[Diabolus]

Proper procedure would've been:
1) Do not announce anything
2) Reseal package
3) Call vendor: explain situation; get RMA and/or return shipping label
4) Return pacakge
5) Wait for new package


+1

Any reasonable person would have followed these procedures. It's strange someone would come to a gun board and post this info.

[uclaplinker]

I wish I could slap about 8 people in this thread, seriously.

Calm down. You don't need to worry about other people's trolling or legal problems.

Helpfully answer their question and move on.

You would be best served by asking the vendor what to do. If you have a lawyer, call them. You may need to turn them into the police.

Whatever you do, in the future, don't broadcast that you've potentially broken the law - whether through fault of someone else or yourself. Your best option is to seek competent legal counsel. Mistakes happen, even with the best possible intentions.

[Diabolus]

I wish I could slap about 8 people in this thread, seriously.

Calm down. You don't need to worry about other people's trolling or legal problems.

Helpfully answer their question and move on.

You would be best served by asking the vendor what to do. If you have a lawyer, call them. You may need to turn them into the police.

Whatever you do, in the future, don't broadcast that you've potentially broken the law - whether through fault of someone else or yourself. Your best option is to seek competent legal counsel. Mistakes happen, even with the best possible intentions.


I always thought you were the nice guy with good advice... never knew you had a violent side.

[Kestryll]

Let's keep the paranoia to a minimum okay?
Yes, we are being watched however that does not mean we are all going down if someone asks a question.

Even if the DOJ sent a plant to ask the most illegal question you could think of, unless you answer with something outside of the law you're fine.
As long as we give information and advice that is letter of the law legal what can they fault us for?

Remember, part of what forums exist for is EDUCATION.
That means not everyone who joins will be up to speed and know all the laws.
Instead of castigating them and accusing them of being a troll, answer with the right info. Either you'll help someone learn or you'll shut down a troll by giving them nothing to work with.


One other point.
You know we are under attack about legalities by “the noobs”; don’t you? We are a gun community, not drama queens. Get on board or get off. No dead weight allowed here.

WTH is this?

Do you really want to play games of value versus post count?
410 in a sea of people with thousands and tens of thousands is not the position to be setting post counts as the benchmark.

Post count means bupkiss as far as input and value.
Some of those multi-thousand posters have added little to the fight while some with less than 100 posts have been instrumental to making changes.
Keep that in mind when judging someone by their post count.

[LAK Supply]

TROLL

Look at this guys post count. First post he admits to a possible felony.

CA Penal Code:

The manufacturing, importation into the state, offering for sale, keeping for sale, exposing for sale,
giving, and lending of a large capacity magazine is controlled. No person may participate in these activities
without a permit issued by the Department of Justice. For exceptions, see Penal Code §§12020(b)(19)-(32).

He did nothing illegal..... He did not manufacture, import (C-Products did this), offer/keep/expose for sale, give or lend a "large capacity" magazine. It's not illegal to receive a magazine. However, advertising the company's error in a public forum that is monitored by the CA Dept. of Theft and Tyranny is probably not the best way to take care of the issue.

[tenpercentfirearms]

On magazines from C Products, I would simply send them back. You technically did not do anything wrong since you ordered 10 rounders and they screwed up. After all it is illegal to send in replacement parts. Just take them apart if you are super paranoid or simply ship them back in their current condition. I wouldn't sweat it that much.

Unless C Products has started working with the DOJ. :rolleyes:

[JPglee1]

I wish I could slap about 8 people in this thread, seriously.


Whatever you do, in the future, don't broadcast that you've potentially broken the law - whether through fault of someone else or yourself. Your best option is to seek competent legal counsel. Mistakes happen, even with the best possible intentions.

Yah no kidding..... Its like chasing down a LEO to show him the video proof of yourself speeding while changing lanes while running a red light :rolleyes:

I remember a thread somewhere once where someone found some live 40mm grenades (for M79/M203) and actually posted pics and asked what to do with them.... Uhh...dig a hole and be quiet? lol

I personally DO NOT condone breaking the law, I would have simply returned the mags if they were not what I ordered/wanted... I wouldn't have made a "snafu" about it in the process.

TO each his own.

J

[jamesob]

you should have kept you keyboard shut and not typed a thing. thats all i got to say about that.

[Satex]

I had to get 3 of my 10 round AR 9mm mags replaced from C-products and I explicitly wrote on a note that I need to be sent 10 rounders. Unfortunately C-products sent me 32 rounders, their receipt even says REPLACE 10 ROUNDERS.

Are you sure they didn't send you those 10/30 round mags like these (http://www.tenpercentfirearms.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=10_47&products_id=149) ones offered for sale legally in CA?

[M. Sage]

Are you sure they didn't send you those 10/30 round mags like these (http://www.tenpercentfirearms.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=10_47&products_id=149) ones offered for sale legally in CA?

Doh, the overlooked option. Check those mags. Sit down with 11 rounds and see if one will take more than 10.

[Ezekiel]

They are definitely 32 rounders.

[hoozaru]

They are definitely 32 rounders.

:dots:

[Chimera]

[QUOTE][/Post count means bupkiss as far as input and value.
Some of those multi-thousand posters have added little to the fight while some with less than 100 posts have been instrumental to making changes.
Keep that in mind when judging someone by their post count.
__________________QUOTE]
There are plenty of us here, regardless of post count or join date that have received tons of useful information from this site. Thanks to the people who actually give knowledgable info rather then speculate others troll status.

[savageevo]

Intent, intent, intent. he posted that he ordered 10 rounders and got something elsel His intent was to buy and get the ten rounders. Intent for the sender, The poster said the reciept was marked for 10 rounders. the intent for the sender was to send 10 rounders. I am sure it was just a big mistake for the sender. Both parties are really not to blame, Well maybe the sender. but its just a mistake. If he is a troll just give him the best scenario to remidy his question and hopefully goes away and if he is a legitimate person needing our help, lets help him by giving him the best advise you know.

[bruce_ventura]

They are definitely 32 rounders.

Ezekial. Think carefully about the last four posts and then SEND THE DAMB THINGS BACK. :banghead:

Life is just one learning experience after another.

[DedEye]

There's lots of good advice here, and lots of bad advice. Which you consider good or bad is a matter of perspective.

If you're comfortable with the interpretation that some have posted here, then there's nothing technically illegal about keeping the magazines. You didn't import them, so you haven't committed any crime there. They're worth their weight in gold seeing as you can't get them in CA in most circumstances.

However, if you want to play it extra safe, send them back. Take them apart first and you'll be playing it safer, but either way it would eliminate the majority of the risk you might face. If you could be charged in this situation, you could still be charged after sending them back, but the burden of proof would be much higher (save for this thread).

It's up to you.

[Ezekiel]

However, if you want to play it extra safe, send them back. Take them apart first and you'll be playing it safer, but either way it would eliminate the majority of the risk you might face. If you could be charged in this situation, you could still be charged after sending them back, but the burden of proof would be much higher (save for this thread).

It's up to you.

First of all, thanks to everyone genuinely posting helpful advice instead of garbage juvenile fluff.

It seems that if it's a crime to be simply sent erroneous equipment, it would imply that it would be very easy to frame someone for anything and I could anonymously send my worst enemy a few 10+ round mags from out of state and he'd be convicted of a felony? That doesn't seem to make any sense to me. I can see how that might make sense with drugs since possession itself can be a felony but from reading the PC, it doesn't seem to be the case with mags.

What I simply did was walk to the mailbox and open the package and examine the mags. I've since taken apart every mag to their component pieces. My plan is to return the mags and call the company because even if they are legal, I wouldn't feel comfortable using them at the range and if I'm not using them at the range, they're kind of useless to me.

[KenpoProfessor]

First of all, thanks to everyone genuinely posting helpful advice instead of garbage juvenile fluff.

It seems that if it's a crime to be simply sent erroneous equipment, it would imply that it would be very easy to frame someone for anything and I could anonymously send my worst enemy a few 10+ round mags from out of state and he'd be convicted of a felony? That doesn't seem to make any sense to me. I can see how that might make sense with drugs since possession itself can be a felony but from reading the PC, it doesn't seem to be the case with mags.

What I simply did was walk to the mailbox and open the package and examine the mags. I've since taken apart every mag to their component pieces. My plan is to return the mags and call the company because even if they are legal, I wouldn't feel comfortable using them at the range and if I'm not using them at the range, they're kind of useless to me.


You can send them to me, PM me for my address :D

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

[tenpercentfirearms]

You can send them to me, PM me for my address :D

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

Note he is in Arizona and that would be legal. If he were in California, maybe not so. Just send them back, no big deal.

[hoozaru]

or disassemble the mags, and have them modified to 10/32 permenantly.

[Fjold]

Note he is in Arizona and that would be legal. If he were in California, maybe not so. Just send them back, no big deal.

Actually, since the law says:

12020. (a) Any person in this state who does any of the following is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in the state prison:

.
.
.

(2) Commencing January 1, 2000, manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives, or lends, any large-capacity magazine


Wouldn't it be illegal to give them to anyone? I don't see a provision in the law to allow a private citizen to give the magazines to anyone, even if the recipient is out of state.

[hawk1]

How about a lesson in the terms import and export.

Import- To bring in from abroad; to introduce from without; especially, to bring (wares or merchandise) into a place or country from a foreign country, in the transactions of commerce

Export- To carry or send abroad, or out of a country, especially to foreign countries, as merchandise or commodities in the way of commerce

The buyer is the importer
The seller is the exporter

[uclaplinker]

I always thought you were the nice guy with good advice... never knew you had a violent side.

ha ha.... not violent. You're imagining the wrong kind of slap... think...

http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/merv/stooges.gif

A LOT of the statements in this thread are flying fancy on the thin line of the law. If you're comfortable there, then feel free to keep them. If you're more cautious, simply call the vendor and send them back.

Technically you imported, but without intent. You did nothing wrong. No sane DA, cop or jury would convict or harass you.

[nothing4u]

Maybe they sent you the 30 round mag cause they felt bad for you and 10 round mags restrictions. :banghead:

[bruss01]

Strictly reading the code, I do not see anything that the OP has done that is illegal. If he would have bought them in Reno and then drove home to CA with them, he could be said to have imported them into the state. If he ordered 10 round magazines and received 32 round magazines, then isn't UPS or Fed Ex or USPS the one who actually brought them into the state? Or is there some kind of legal jargon that could be read in such a way as to make the man who ordered a TOTALLY DIFFERENT AND LEGAL PRODUCT somehow responsible that this OTHER PRODUCT was imported? That just does not compute.

So what if you're cleaning out the garage or atic or basement some day and you find a box you don't remember... looks like a bunch of junk that you or your wife or your kid picked up at a yard sale... Looks like years and years of dust on it, and you have no recollection of when or where it was acquired... maybe it was there when you bought the house and are just now finding it. You open it up and (along with broken kids toys and some vintage electronics) there are a bunch of hi-cap magazines. Now what do you do? Disassemble them? Turn them in to the police? Transport them out of state? Destroy them?

Or keep them?

Looking at the technicalities of the law as quoted in previous posts, it looks like the Gun Fairy has visited you. You can't be said to have imported them. You simply woke up one morning with them under your pillow, figuratively speaking. Technically, I cannot see what, if any, law has been broken.

I believe the OP has been visited by the Gun Fairy. She switched the product he ordered for something "special" while he was asleep. Now, I wouldn't go showing them off at the range nor using them in a self-defense shooting, because not everyone believes in the Gun Fairy. But in simply posessing them I do not believe the OP is doing anything wrong or illegal. If that is outside his comfort zone, fine, disassemble them and return them as others have suggested.

I think the OP brought up a good question for discussion. Regardless of the fact that he maybe should have been a little more discreet with the specifics, I believe it is a totally valid topic for discussion. Good educational topic.

[bruss01]

How about a lesson in the terms import and export.

Import- To bring in from abroad; to introduce from without; especially, to bring (wares or merchandise) into a place or country from a foreign country, in the transactions of commerce

The buyer is the importer


Technically, isn't the shipper the importer? If a shipper delivers something to you that you had no role in bringing into the state (it's not what you ordered) then you cannot be said to have brought it into the state. And although I do see a prohibition on giving a hi-cap magazine to someone, I do not see a prohibition on receiving one as a gift. So technically if someone gave me a hi-cap magazine, they are the one breaking the law, right? Is that a very small loophole, or did I miss something?

If that's the case then I can see a lot of hi-cap magazine owners making deathbed gifts of their hi-caps to people who would truly appreciate them.

[uclaplinker]

So what if you're cleaning out the garage or atic or basement some day and you find a box you don't remember... looks like a bunch of junk that you or your wife or your kid picked up at a yard sale... Looks like years and years of dust on it, and you have no recollection of when or where it was acquired... maybe it was there when you bought the house and are just now finding it. You open it up and (along with broken kids toys and some vintage electronics) there are a bunch of hi-cap magazines. Now what do you do? Disassemble them? Turn them in to the police? Transport them out of state? Destroy them?



This has been covered exhaustively and is quite different from this case where there's a clear importation, even if accidental.


Looking at the technicalities of the law as quoted in previous posts, it looks like the Gun Fairy has visited you. You can't be said to have imported them. You simply woke up one morning with them under your pillow, figuratively speaking. Technically, I cannot see what, if any, law has been broken.

I believe the OP has been visited by the Gun Fairy. She switched the product he ordered for something "special" while he was asleep. Now, I wouldn't go showing them off at the range nor using them in a self-defense shooting, because not everyone believes in the Gun Fairy. But in simply posessing them I do not believe the OP is doing anything wrong or illegal. If that is outside his comfort zone, fine, disassemble them and return them as others have suggested.

I think the OP brought up a good question for discussion. Regardless of the fact that he maybe should have been a little more discreet with the specifics, I believe it is a totally valid topic for discussion. Good educational topic.

I disagree with the part in red. Unintentional importation is still importing. I prefer erring on the side of caution.

If he wants magazines capable of holding 30rds of .223 he should buy a few .50Beowulf mags.

[bruss01]

I prefer erring on the side of caution.



The question is, how much caution? Every person has their own personal comfort level. Some are comfortable driving 55 mph in a 65 mph zone... others drive right at 65 and feel comfortable... still others live life in the fast lane and typically drive 75, 80 or more... and in the past 10 years have not gotten any traffic tickets or been in any accidents.

I was addressing opinions on what is technically legal, you are addressing what you personally find to be a "comfortable" level of caution. Two different subjects.

The greatest degree of caution would be to not own any firearms, magazines or ammunition at all. That's the only way to be truly safe that you will not someday wake up to find you've become a "firearms felon" overnight while you slept. But not many of us here would want to adopt that degree of caution. No, instead we "live life in the fast lane" and depend on our wits and our ability to keep current on changes in the law to keep us out of trouble. There's a risk, but it's one most of us find acceptable for what we get in return for it. Look at all the people skating close to the edge with OLL's... arguably legal, but far from "safe" if the average garden variety police officer has to consult a flow chart or a manual to know whether to haul the owner in or not.

Some are comfortable as long as they are sure what they are doing is arguably technically legal. Others are comfortable only when acting so conservatively that even they have to conceed that they are well away from the boundary between legality and not-legality. I was discussing opinions on what is technically legal, and leaving the OP to decide his own comfort level for himself. Would love to see the discussion follow along those lines.

By your logic, if you order a beanie baby doll and you are mistakenly shipped a machine gun or a pound of hashish or a bengal tiger, you are then an importer of hashish (or a machine gun or dangerous animal). That logic does not follow. If you didn't ask for it, didn't pay for it, didn't have anything to do with it getting to your doorstep other than you asked the person that sent it for some other LEGAL item, I don't believe there's a court on earth that could fairly convict you of being an importer of illegal items. Your knowing posession of those illegal items AFTER they are imported may become an issue if they are not immediately reported, but we have established (I think) that merely posessing hi-cap magazines is not outside the law.

I may not be a lawyer, but I'd love to hear from some of our legal scholars on that particular point.

[hawk1]

Technically, isn't the shipper the importer? If a shipper delivers something to you that you had no role in bringing into the state (it's not what you ordered) then you cannot be said to have brought it into the state. And although I do see a prohibition on giving a hi-cap magazine to someone, I do not see a prohibition on receiving one as a gift. So technically if someone gave me a hi-cap magazine, they are the one breaking the law, right? Is that a very small loophole, or did I miss something?

If that's the case then I can see a lot of hi-cap magazine owners making deathbed gifts of their hi-caps to people who would truly appreciate them.


Bottom line is they were sent into the state after the 2001 date banning hi cap mags. They are illegal. Even as the op said they shipped him the wrong mags, they are still illegal. He did not find them in the attic from years past with the kids toys. There is date that these were sent into state and that date is after the ban. Period. He needs to make arrangements to send them back.

[GenLee]

:ban: TROLL

[bruss01]

Bottom line is they were sent into the state after the 2001 date banning hi cap mags. They are illegal. Even as the op said they shipped him the wrong mags, they are still illegal. He did not find them in the attic from years past with the kids toys. There is date that these were sent into state and that date is after the ban. Period. He needs to make arrangements to send them back.

Show me a section of code that states that posession of a hi-cap magazine manufactured after 2001 is illegal. You will find prohibitions against importing, manufacturing, giving as a gift, or selling such an item. What is prohibited is the MEANS of obtaining it, not posession. You will not find a prohibition on merely possessing it or even receiving it. The legality/illegality in this situation hangs on the definition of "importing". I'm maintaining that, strictly speaking, if he did not order THAT PRODUCT then he did not import it. Show me CA legal code that says otherwise if that's what you believe. I maintain that if any laws were broken, it is not the OP who broke them and he is breaking no law by simply taking no further action in the matter. Prove me wrong. Show me the code.

Coming home and finding something on your doorstep or in your mailbox THAT YOU DID NOT ORDER seems very much akin to having it drop out of the sky, or be tilled up while digging your new garden, or discovering it wedged between some 2x4's while doing some remodeling. You didn't violate any means of obtaining that item, which is what is prohibited. Posession itself is not prohibited as far as I can see.

I think the thing that "gets" most folks regarding this is that it is not something you can "make" happen. If you goof, write down the wrong part number and they ship you that part, then you arguably ARE the importer. If your hand slipped and you clicked the wrong button in the online order page, YOU were the cause of it being imported. But when something happens that is outside your control and contrary to your intent, I do not think you can be legitimately judged to be the importer. Somebody made a mistake, somebody broke a law - but they did it entirely without your consent or knowledge. You came home and found their "mistake" on your doorstep. YOU broke no laws, nor did you intend to skirt any laws. What happened, happened - and technically, your continued posession of those items violates no law that I can see in a strict legal sense.

He paid for a product he didn't receive. He received a product he didn't pay for. If he decides it's all too much bother to try to straighten out and probably cancels out anyway... I don't think that's a crime. Worst case, the company sends him an additional bill for the product he didn't order.

Now, can someone who gets a bee in their bonnet decide to try to prove that he DID purchase or DID import that item? They can try, certainly. Do I think he has a defensible leg to stand on? Technically, I do think so. Is it worth it to him to try and take advantage of the small technical loophole? That's for him to decide. Admittedly this is putting a fine point on it. But cases often hinge on the finer points. If this assertion is wrong, then explain how and why it is wrong, according to the code. Don't just say "Well that's not what I heard..." or "I can't believe that..." Show the code and make your case.

Again, not a lawyer... but just reading the code and applying as much logic as I can, this is what I come up with.

[CSACANNONEER]

Disassemble them and you're fine. Or, bring them to the shop I work at and the shop take them off your hands. Yes, the shop has a "high cap" permit.

[Shotgun Man]

All this talk about the OP "importing" the magazines. I believe you have to knowingly import. Here is the Judicial Council Jury instruction on 12020(a)(2). I removed the inapplicable language:


"2500. Illegal Possession, etc., of Weapon (Pen. Code, § 12020(a)(1) & (2))

__________________________________________________ _______________

The defendant is charged [in Count _____ ] with unlawfully importing a large-capacity magazine.

To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must prove that:

1. The defendant imported into California a large-capacity magazine;

2. The defendant knew that he imported the large-capacity magazine ;

AND

3. The defendant knew that the object was a high-capacity magazine."


The judicial council is basically trying to say that you have knowingly import the magazine.

[mymonkeyman]

The real problem is not whether he is actually guilty in a theoretical sense, but rather what could be argued to a jury. A prosecutor could argue that keeping the magazines after he received them and realized they were large-capacity magazines is circumstantial evidence of his intent to knowingly import them.

[CSACANNONEER]

The real problem is not whether he is actually guilty in a theoretical sense, but rather what could be argued to a jury. A prosecutor could argue that keeping the magazines after he received them and realized they were large-capacity magazines is circumstantial evidence of his intent to knowingly import them.

But the law also says that he can not give them away! So, by law, he has to keep them. Right?

[hawk1]

Show me a section of code that states that posession of a hi-cap magazine manufactured after 2001 is illegal. You will find prohibitions against importing, manufacturing, giving as a gift, or selling such an item. What is prohibited is the MEANS of obtaining it, not posession. You will not find a prohibition on merely possessing it or even receiving it. The legality/illegality in this situation hangs on the definition of "importing". I'm maintaining that, strictly speaking, if he did not order THAT PRODUCT then he did not import it. Show me CA legal code that says otherwise if that's what you believe. I maintain that if any laws were broken, it is not the OP who broke them and he is breaking no law by simply taking no further action in the matter. Prove me wrong. Show me the code.

That's not what I said. I know possesion is not illegal. They are illegal in that they are more than 10 round capacity being imported into the state after the ban.

Coming home and finding something on your doorstep or in your mailbox THAT YOU DID NOT ORDER seems very much akin to having it drop out of the sky, or be tilled up while digging your new garden, or discovering it wedged between some 2x4's while doing some remodeling. You didn't violate any means of obtaining that item, which is what is prohibited. Posession itself is not prohibited as far as I can see.

You can cut and slice it anyway you want. They did not drop out of the sky, they were not dug up in his garden. They were shipped to his address in an order he placed. Granted not for hi caps. The order will clearly show the date as being after the ban.

I think the thing that "gets" most folks regarding this is that it is not something you can "make" happen. If you goof, write down the wrong part number and they ship you that part, then you arguably ARE the importer. If your hand slipped and you clicked the wrong button in the online order page, YOU were the cause of it being imported. But when something happens that is outside your control and contrary to your intent, I do not think you can be legitimately judged to be the importer. Somebody made a mistake, somebody broke a law - but they did it entirely without your consent or knowledge. You came home and found their "mistake" on your doorstep. YOU broke no laws, nor did you intend to skirt any laws. What happened, happened - and technically, your continued posession of those items violates no law that I can see in a strict legal sense.

This is where you are wrong. Granted, none of this was his doing. But by not shipping back the illegal items he then has to affirm that he owned them prior to the 2001 ban. That he can't do. There is no other way to gain ownership after the ban was passed. If I leave a bag full of my hi caps on your doorstep and you come home to find them. This does not grant you a pass and allow you to legally own the mags. How about if you find that machine gun stuffed in the rafters from generations past. Are you now legally able to "own it"?

He paid for a product he didn't receive. He received a product he didn't pay for. If he decides it's all too much bother to try to straighten out and probably cancels out anyway... I don't think that's a crime. Worst case, the company sends him an additional bill for the product he didn't order.

You may not think thats a crime, but it is. Again, he did not have possesion of the complete assembled mags prior to the ban.

Now, can someone who gets a bee in their bonnet decide to try to prove that he DID purchase or DID import that item? They can try, certainly. Do I think he has a defensible leg to stand on? Technically, I do think so. Is it worth it to him to try and take advantage of the small technical loophole? That's for him to decide. Admittedly this is putting a fine point on it. But cases often hinge on the finer points. If this assertion is wrong, then explain how and why it is wrong, according to the code. Don't just say "Well that's not what I heard..." or "I can't believe that..." Show the code and make your case.

Here is the pdf as written by the DOJ. http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/infobuls/9906.pdf


Again, not a lawyer... but just reading the code and applying as much logic as I can, this is what I come up with.

Read the DOJ pdf maybe it'll help you see they are not legal for him to keep. If after that you find that you are still right. Then more power to ya...

[hawk1]

All this talk about the OP "importing" the magazines. I believe you have to knowingly import. Here is the Judicial Council Jury instruction on 12020(a)(2). I removed the inapplicable language:


"2500. Illegal Possession, etc., of Weapon (Pen. Code, § 12020(a)(1) & (2))

__________________________________________________ _______________

The defendant is charged [in Count _____ ] with unlawfully importing a large-capacity magazine.

To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must prove that:

1. The defendant imported into California a large-capacity magazine;

2. The defendant knew that he imported the large-capacity magazine ;

AND

3. The defendant knew that the object was a high-capacity magazine."


The judicial council is basically trying to say that you have knowingly import the magazine.

I highlighted #3 above. I believe that when he opened the package and discovered the mags to be of more than 10 round capacity it can be said he knew.
However, had he tossed the package aside to open at a later date and not "discovered" they were hi caps, they would not be able to prove #3.

[LECTRIKHED]

This post reminded me of a story from my teenage years:

When I was in tenth grade one of my friends got into some legal troubles. He and a group of them went back to their junior high and vandalized it. Nothing too bad, just some stupid stuff like urinating and defacating on tables. Drawing on stuff with a sharpie.

Cops came and they were hiding in the bushes. My friends was caught by the police. He had with him his new camcorder that he just loved. Police laughed and said "don't tell me you videotaped yourselves." Well that is exactly what happened.

Police took his camera and tape as evidence. He was sentenced to 100s of hours of community service, mainly for being so stupid. He never got his camera back either. Police kept it for "evidence."

The guy learned his lesson and stopped doing stupid crimes. He's now a college grad and has a decent future as an accountant.

[Shotgun Man]

I highlighted #3 above. I believe that when he opened the package and discovered the mags to be of more than 10 round capacity it can be said he knew.
However, had he tossed the package aside to open at a later date and not "discovered" they were hi caps, they would not be able to prove #3.

So you're saying that once he discovered they were hi-caps, he "knew" that he had imported them, and suddenly he is guilty of a crime. It doesn't matter that he destroys them or what not, that's simply covering up his crime, by your interpretation. Maybe we can charge with destroying evidence too! If there was a witness to his conduct he would still be convicted. By your reading, the guy has already committed felonious acts through no fault his own.

That strikes me as absurd.

The defendant would also likely get an instruction requiring there must exist a union of intent and act-- that is when he ordered the regular caps he intended to import the hi-caps.

[Shotgun Man]

This post reminded me of a story from my teenage years:

When I was in tenth grade one of my friends got into some legal troubles. He and a group of them went back to their junior high and vandalized it. Nothing too bad, just some stupid stuff like urinating and defacating on tables. Drawing on stuff with a sharpie.

Cops came and they were hiding in the bushes. My friends was caught by the police. He had with him his new camcorder that he just loved. Police laughed and said "don't tell me you videotaped yourselves." Well that is exactly what happened.

Police took his camera and tape as evidence. He was sentenced to 100s of hours of community service, mainly for being so stupid. He never got his camera back either. Police kept it for "evidence."

The guy learned his lesson and stopped doing stupid crimes. He's now a college grad and has a decent future as an accountant.

I'm not sure how your anecdote relates to this thread. I just don't see the comparison.

[uclaplinker]

For a good time dial (916) 263-4887; ask for Iggy.

[mymonkeyman]

But the law also says that he can not give them away! So, by law, he has to keep them. Right?

He can't give them to someone in this state without a large-capacity magazine permit. So he could send them back to the out of state vendor, transfer them to a large-capacity magazine permit holder, or destroy them.

[Riodog]

This is just another 'cry in the darkness' for the attention someone didn't get as a child. If you're bound and determined, and your sense of morality points in that direction then just put the damn things back in the box they came in and write "return to sender" on the outside and a note on the inside asking for the correct ones. End of problem...

Rio

[hawk1]

So you're saying that once he discovered they were hi-caps, he "knew" that he had imported them, and suddenly he is guilty of a crime. It doesn't matter that he destroys them or what not, that's simply covering up his crime, by your interpretation. Maybe we can charge with destroying evidence too! If there was a witness to his conduct he would still be convicted. By your reading, the guy has already committed felonious acts through no fault his own.

That strikes me as absurd.

The defendant would also likely get an instruction requiring there must exist a union of intent and act-- that is when he ordered the regular caps he intended to import the hi-caps.

No, as I read the jury instructions, when he opened them and discovered they were hi caps he knew that they were more than 10 round capacity
#3 as you wrote it, had nothing to do with if he knew he was importing.
it said;
3. The defendant knew that the object was a high-capacity magazine."
On it's own it has nothing to do with importing. It has to do with what the person imported.

His "felonious" act was knowing they were hi caps and keeping them. Not that he "imported them".
You guys can argue till your blue in the face. You cannot legally own and keep them just because you found them or the postman delivered them to you without your knowledge or consent.

[510dat]

He can't give them to someone in this state without a large-capacity magazine permit. So he could send them back to the out of state vendor, transfer them to a large-capacity magazine permit holder, or destroy them.

Where do I get one of those? Is there some place I can download the application from? And would I send it to the DOJ, or my local Sheriff's Department?

[tenpercentfirearms]

You can buy large capacity magazines after 2000 and it is not a crime for you. There is zero penalty for possession. However, it might be a crime for the person selling, giving, or importing them for you. If you knowingly help someone else commit a crime, isn't that conspiracy?

First of all, morally speaking, why would you keep something you did not order? That is not right. People make mistakes and you should not prey on those mistakes. Second, do you want to be the test case for if we can "buy" large capacity magazines. This thread would be a pretty easy score for anyone wanting to arrest someone for "buying" large capacity magazines.

For those of you hell bent on testing this, do it with your own time and resources. I would respect that. Hopefully the OP has already shipped the magazines back and I am sure C Products will take care of you.

[bruss01]

Read the DOJ pdf maybe it'll help you see they are not legal for him to keep. If after that you find that you are still right. Then more power to ya...

I read the PDF. Here is the relevant section:
Large Capacity Firearms Magazines
Effective January 1, 2000, the manufacture, importation, sale, or transfer of any large capacity
firearms magazine, except to specifically designated parties and under specified conditions, will be
prohibited by law. Possession of large capacity magazines is not restricted by this law. All
applicable federal laws and regulations regarding large capacity magazines remain in force and must
continue to be observed.
A large capacity magazine is defined as any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to
accept more than ten rounds but shall not include any .22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device,
or a magazine that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than 10
rounds.
Under this law, sales of large capacity magazines to persons authorized under PC §12020(b),
such as law enforcement agencies, peace officers, licensed firearms dealers, armored car companies,
museums, and theatrical companies are permitted. Dealer record keeping requirements include the
maintenance of records of sales for all transactions, including a copy of the official invoice of the
law enforcement agency, or an authorization letter on the letterhead of the company to which the
sale is being made. The records must be maintained at the dealership location for three years and
made available to law enforcement upon request.
The import of large capacity magazines into California or the export of large capacity
magazines out of California will require a permit. Large Capacity Magazine Permits may be issued
by the Department of Justice, upon request, only to firearms dealers who are listed on the
Department of Justice (DOJ) Centralized List of Firearms Dealers. Dealers seeking a Large
Capacity Magazine Permit must certify they have a bona fide marketplace for the import or export
of large capacity magazines and that they will comply with all applicable state laws and regulations.
Permittees are required to keep acquisition and disposition transaction records of the importation
and exportation of large capacity magazines. Records shall include transaction date, transaction
volume; and the name, address, and Federal Firearms License number (if any) of the out of state
transferee or transferor. Records must be maintained at the dealership for three years and be made
available to representatives of the DOJ or any other law enforcement agency upon request.
Senate Bill (SB) 23 - New Laws Pertaining to
Large Capacity Magazines and Assault Weapons
Page 2
FD-1 (12/99)
Application forms for the Large Capacity Magazine Permit have been provided to all firearms
dealers with the 2000 Centralized List Renewal Application Form mailings. Additional Large
Capacity Magazine Permit applications may be obtained by contacting the Firearms Division at
(916) 227-3703.

Again, we see that simple possession is not prohibited. Your analogy about finding a machine gun in the atic is non-sequitur, because possession of a machine gun is prohibited. A better analogy would be if you approach a hooker and offer to pay her for sex, that's illegal. But if you approach the same woman, buy her a drink, take her home and have sex for free, that's completely legal. The end result is not prohibited, it's the method of obtaining it that's prohibited.

If I order a teddy bear on line, and the vendor ships me a fruit basket, I have not imported a fruit basket. I didn't order a fruit basket, I didn't pay for a fruit basket, it doesn't say "fruit basket" on my recipt nor on the packing slip... they all say "teddy bear". But I'm going to eat the goddamn fruit basket anyway. I might enjoy it more than the freakin' bear after all. He didn't import hi-cap magazines because there is no evidence to support the idea that that is what he ordered. Therefore he did not break the law in the strict legal sense IMHO.

If you bring over a bag full of hi-cap magazines and leave them on my doorstep, then sure the law has been broken. Read the law - it prohibits GIVING hi-cap magazines. I don't see a corresponding prohibition on RECEIVING them as a gift, though. Another very small but technically correct loophole? So in your example, YOU would have broken the law, but not me.

In fact, if you read the PDF again you will see that DOJ thinks it would be illegal for him to ship them out of state, seeing he does not have the required permit. So I guess he can either destroy them or keep them. (btw that is not what I believe - I cannot find that provision in the law, but if you are using their PDF as gospel, then you have to believe it - check the law for yourself at http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12020.html)

[Fjold]

His "felonious" act was knowing they were hi caps and keeping them. Not that he "imported them".
You guys can argue till your blue in the face. You cannot legally own and keep them just because you found them or the postman delivered them to you without your knowledge or consent.

Citation needed

[CSACANNONEER]

He can't give them to someone in this state without a large-capacity magazine permit. So he could send them back to the out of state vendor, transfer them to a large-capacity magazine permit holder, or destroy them.

He can not return them, export them or give them to someone out of state without a permit to do so. To return them, he would have to export them. They were imported without him knowing that they were "high-caps" so, he didn't do anything illegal. Now that he knows they are "high-caps," he can not legally ship them out of state so, it could be argueed that he is bound by law to keep them.

[bruss01]

BTW this thread has stirred up some interesting thoughts about hi-cap magazines in general. For instance, in the following section of law, how permanent is "permanent"?

(25) As used in this section, "large-capacity magazine" means any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, but shall not be construed to include any of the following:

(A) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than 10 rounds.

Even if you saw off a magazine in a "permanent" fashion, you could always weld it back together couldn't you, or glue it? How permanent is permanent? Does that mean, anything you cannot undo simply with your own two hands? Is there any legal definition pertaining to this sort of alteration?

I wonder what the legality would be of going to Nevada, buying some hi-cap magazines, disassembling them, submerging the mag body in a pan of molten parafin, letting it harden, and then bringing the pieces and the slab of hardened wax back into the state of CA? Grey area? Or is there a specific section of CA law that addresses this contingency? Not that I plan on doing this or have any need to do it - heck, 10 rounds has always been enough for me to do all the shooting I needed to do, just curious about the technical legality of such a maneuver.

(sorry for the small amt of lateral thread drift, will now try to bring back on-topic)

So let's say that as a result of Heller, the hi-cap ban is challenged in court and found to be an infringement, therefore null and void. And let's say our OP wanted to hang on to these hi-cap magazines that fate has dropped in his lap in anticipation of just such an event, but be relatively "safe" in the meantime. Could he do what I've suggested above? Disassemble, embed the mag bodies in wax, making them unusable as magazines unless you first melt the wax and clean them? How about embedding in epoxy and later soaking them in acetone or other solvent? is that "permanent" enough?

Makes you wonder how many pillar candles in California bedrooms and living rooms have interesting "surprises" hidden away inside, doesn't it?

And another question: Statute of limitations is what, 7 years? So if you do import a hi-cap magazine and no one discovers the fact for 7 years, then you can own them openly with impunity, safe from prosecution? Just asking regarding the legal technicality out of curiosity.

[dfletcher]

(25) "As used in this section, "large-capacity magazine" means any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.........."

Does anyone think this could be interpreted to mean those double ended or triangle magazines that are glued together (Butler Creek 10/22 mags for example) that take 10 rounds each, 30 in total? Is it a single device which holds 30 rounds or are they 3 separate devices which each hold 10 rounds?

I know the logical answer.

[uclaplinker]

(25) "As used in this section, "large-capacity magazine" means any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.........."

Does anyone think this could be interpreted to mean those double ended or triangle magazines that are glued together (Butler Creek 10/22 mags for example) that take 10 rounds each, 30 in total? Is it a single device which holds 30 rounds or are they 3 separate devices which each hold 10 rounds?

I know the logical answer.

As much as I dislike it, if they're GLUED, that's a hi-cap. If they're locked together like puzzle pieces, it's not. Permanence will be what dictates.

Gene and I had this discussion recently...

[Piper]

I had to get 3 of my 10 round AR 9mm mags replaced from C-products and I explicitly wrote on a note that I need to be sent 10 rounders. Unfortunately C-products sent me 32 rounders, their receipt even says REPLACE 10 ROUNDERS.

Should I just be notifying of them their error and send it back to them or should I be bringing the mags to the police and reporting what happened? I'd like to avoid any sort of issues involved with legality so would like to do everything by the book. Would disassembling the mags make them effectively nonfunctional so that I can legally ship them back?

I don't know if anyone else has said this because I havn't read that far into this thread, but I would shut my yap and speak to no one about this until the law is repealed.

[Decoligny]

BTW this thread has stirred up some interesting thoughts about hi-cap magazines in general. For instance, in the following section of law, how permanent is "permanent"?



Even if you saw off a magazine in a "permanent" fashion, you could always weld it back together couldn't you, or glue it? How permanent is permanent? Does that mean, anything you cannot undo simply with your own two hands? Is there any legal definition pertaining to this sort of alteration?

I wonder what the legality would be of going to Nevada, buying some hi-cap magazines, disassembling them, submerging the mag body in a pan of molten parafin, letting it harden, and then bringing the pieces and the slab of hardened wax back into the state of CA? Grey area? Or is there a specific section of CA law that addresses this contingency? Not that I plan on doing this or have any need to do it - heck, 10 rounds has always been enough for me to do all the shooting I needed to do, just curious about the technical legality of such a maneuver.

(sorry for the small amt of lateral thread drift, will now try to bring back on-topic)

So let's say that as a result of Heller, the hi-cap ban is challenged in court and found to be an infringement, therefore null and void. And let's say our OP wanted to hang on to these hi-cap magazines that fate has dropped in his lap in anticipation of just such an event, but be relatively "safe" in the meantime. Could he do what I've suggested above? Disassemble, embed the mag bodies in wax, making them unusable as magazines unless you first melt the wax and clean them? How about embedding in epoxy and later soaking them in acetone or other solvent? is that "permanent" enough?

Makes you wonder how many pillar candles in California bedrooms and living rooms have interesting "surprises" hidden away inside, doesn't it?

And another question: Statute of limitations is what, 7 years? So if you do import a hi-cap magazine and no one discovers the fact for 7 years, then you can own them openly with impunity, safe from prosecution? Just asking regarding the legal technicality out of curiosity.


You can bring all the hi-cap pieces into the state that you want to. You just can't re-assemble them (manufacture).

[Ezekiel]

Sorry for the lack of updates. It's flu season and I've been infected.

I haven't called the company yet because of my cough, I can barely talk without coughing so I really can't even communicate on the phone.

Let me get this straight, it would be illegal for me to actually even ship these back to the manufacturer disassembled?

It looks like I might need to contact a lawyer once I'm better.

[ViPER395]

I had to get 3 of my 10 round AR 9mm mags replaced from C-products and I explicitly wrote on a note that I need to be sent 10 rounders. Unfortunately C-products sent me 32 rounders, their receipt even says REPLACE 10 ROUNDERS.

Should I just be notifying of them their error and send it back to them or should I be bringing the mags to the police and reporting what happened? I'd like to avoid any sort of issues involved with legality so would like to do everything by the book. Would disassembling the mags make them effectively nonfunctional so that I can legally ship them back?

Whats the proper procedure if a vendor ships you something illegal by accident

You don't post about it on the internet :confused: :mad:

[Ezekiel]

Called the company, told them I can't ship it back to them per CA law so they're just going to send me replacements, hopefully they won't ship me 32 rounders again.

I want to dispose of the magazines and from what I understand I give to a special class FFL holder for that?

[uclaplinker]

Safest: break them down as parts and either keep them or sell them. There's nothing illegal about parts.

Probably safe: keep them as-is. You aren't liable for another person's mistake.


Sorry for the lack of updates. It's flu season and I've been infected.

I haven't called the company yet because of my cough, I can barely talk without coughing so I really can't even communicate on the phone.

Let me get this straight, it would be illegal for me to actually even ship these back to the manufacturer disassembled?

It looks like I might need to contact a lawyer once I'm better.